4518 2007-05-02 02:03:19 +0000 inaccurate description of PSVI in 3.16.5 2008-02-08 19:56:01 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XML Schema Structures: XSD Part 1 1.1 only Macintosh All RESOLVED FIXED editorial cluster resolved P4 minor --- 1 cmsmcq cmsmcq www-xml-schema-comments oldest_to_newest 14971 0 cmsmcq 2007-05-02 02:03:19 +0000 Section 3.16.5 of Structures reads in part: Note: The ID/IDREF binding information item, unlike most other aspects of this specification, is essentially an internal bookkeeping mechanism. It is introduced to support the definition of Validation Root Valid (ID/IDREF) (§3.3.4) above. Accordingly, conformant processors may, but are not required to, expose it in the ·post-schema-validation infoset·. In other words, the above constraint is to be read as saying ·assessment· proceeds as if such an infoset item existed. This seems to reflect one of the conflicting views of the PSVI visible in XSD 1.0, and not the one the WG eventually agreed to adopt. The implication here is that the ID/IDREF table is unusual in being optionally exposed or hidden, while OTHER parts of the PSVI must be exposed. That proposition is false: no part of the PSVI is required to be exposed as a condition of XSD conformance. The note should either be reworded or deleted entirely. Deletion is simpler. This may be regarded as an editorial issue. 18726 1 cmsmcq 2008-02-04 16:17:25 +0000 In an effort to make better use of Bugzilla, we are going to use the 'severity' field to classify issues by perceived difficulty. This bug is getting severity=minor to reflect the existing whiteboard note 'easy'. 18860 2 cmsmcq 2008-02-08 02:19:47 +0000 A wording proposal including changes for this issue went to the WG on 7 February 2008: http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.consent.200801.html#composition (member-only link). 18903 3 cmsmcq 2008-02-08 19:56:01 +0000 The 'Structures Omnibus 1' proposal mentioned in an earlier comment was adopted by the XML Schema Working Group today. http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.consent.200801.html (member-only link) The XML Schema WG believes that the changes adopted today resolve this issue fully. I'm changing its status accordingly. The change in status should cause email to be sent to the originator of this issue, to whom the following request is addressed. Please review the changes adopted and let us know if you agree with this resolution of your issue, by adding a comment to the issue record and changing the Status of the issue to Closed. Or, if you do not agree with this resolution, please add a comment explaining why. If you wish to appeal the WG's decision to the Director, then also change the Status of the record to Reopened. If you wish to record your dissent, but do not wish to appeal the decision to the Director, then change the Status of the record to Closed. If we do not hear from you in the next two weeks, we will assume you agree with the WG decision.